The EPA has handed down its fuel economy estimates for Chevrolet's new 2014 Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel. The EPA is estimating the vehicle will get 46 mpg on the highway, making it the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid vehicle in America. General Motors says that the car will be available in certain cities this spring and around the country and Canada early this fall.

The turbodiesel version of the Cruze is equipped with a six-speed automatic transmission and has an estimated range of 700 highway miles on a single tank of diesel fuel.

The 2.0-liter turbodiesel engine is rated for 148 hp and 258 pound-feet of torque (the engine features a special over boost function that can increase torque to 280 pound-foot for short bursts as needed). The vehicle is capable of accelerating from a stop to 60 mph in 8.6 seconds.

“We harnessed generations of diesel expertise to adapt our world-class global engine for the North American market,” said Gary Altman, chief engineer, Chevrolet Cruze Diesel. “The Cruze Diesel is the best diesel passenger car out there. Chevrolet is redefining the meaning of great fuel economy with this car.”

The starting price for the car is $25,695 including the $810 destination charge. The Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel also features the Chevrolet MyLink infotainment system, 17-inch wheels, leather seating, a five-year 100,000-mile powertrain warranty, and a two-year maintenance plan as standard equipment.

my reason to buy diesel was the torque. i have a 2012 golf diesel that gets excellent mileage on the highway but also hauls ass from a dead stop. that's worth the premium on the engine technology. you can't get that from a prius or cheaper more efficient gas engine.

The Cruze Eco isn't a fair comparison to the Cruze Turbo Diesel because the Eco is only available (AFAIK) with a 6 speed manual.

I test drove one awhile back and the 6th gear is ridiculously low; it is virtually useless below 70mph requiring downshifts to pass, something I don't have to do in my SVT Focus (~32MPG) or my wife's Turbo Beetle (~35mpg)

The transmission on the Cruze Eco is about as bad as the Fiat 500 as well. The shifts are clunky and the pedal has no dead zone. I understand they're trying to make the 500 sporty, but what's GM's excuse for the Eco? Why does the pedal have a foot of travel and engage in the first inch?

The Cruze is just a disaster at all levels. I hope the 6T40E has its shifting bugs worked out in the diesel. Ford uses the same transmission in a bunch of its vehicles (including my 2010 Escape) and the last ECU update I received 2 years ago made a night and day difference whereas GM still has a number of complaints about their version of the transmission in a variety of cars.

As far as the Eco manuals 6th gear, ITS SUPPOSED TO BE LOW. It's for fuel economy, not acceleration. But you can certainly use it lower than 70 mph. I shift into 6th at 42-43 mph.

On the highway I never have to downshift to pass if I don't want to. Sure I can't sprint around another car in 6th, but I don't need to downshift. There's nothing wrong with having to downshift either. It's this kind of laziness that is why many American cars don't get as good of mileage. Because people complain at the slightest effort of having to drive.

THANK YOU! Exactly my thoughts on the situation. It's people like that previous poster is why there are so many 4 cylinder cars that scream on the highway, it's because people like him don't want to downshift in order to accelerate! Hint hint, if you drive an autotragic, it does exactly that whether he realizes it (4th to 3rd transition) or not (6th to 5th transition).

I wouldn't call myself lazy. I've owned nothing but 6 speed manuals all my life. I'd installed to autobahn gearset and differential in my 04 R32 just to get the lower ratio. But GM poorly implemented it. The car doesn't produce enough torque at any speed to justify the 0.3:1 ratio (the lowest of any 4 cylinder petrol engine in production.)

I don't believe you FIT. I drove the car. The 6th gear is crippling. I couldn't imagine it with additional weight either. I predict massive flywheel failures in short time too. This is why they went bankrupt in the first place. Poorly engineered shortsighted implementations.

I assure you its fine. Furthermore, I have a tune on mine which actually lowers the boost in the Economy mode from 16 psi to 14 psi. I still have absolutely no trouble on the highway. You won't accelerate quickly in 6th, but you can. I am in 6th at 42-43 mph and up. 65 mph is around 2000 rpm and then the car is at its peak torque and moves just fine in 6th. Again, no speedster but gets around just fine.

On top of it all, the 2012 actually got a numerically lower axle ratio than the 2011s which was how it got slightly better mileage at a slight sacrifice to acceleration. Mine is a 2012.

Been driving it every day for 13 months dude. Think I know how it drives.

LuK, the manufacture of the clutch system used in the MT6-75, specifically advises manufactures not to use their DMF's in low-rpm applications. This has bitten VW hard with premature diesel-application DMF failures over the last decade, and although DMF design has improved, no other company than VW uses DMF's in diesels.

FIT, I used to work for Ford as a transmission engineer. I know transmissions better than anybody on DT, which is why if you look at my history, I always comment on drive train articles (for better or worse) and even fuel-related articles, such as why 20% ethanol fuel won't make any difference to vehicles that already operate fine on 10-15%.

I can feel when a transmission is poorly implemented within minutes of a road test. The vibration under acceleration in the low gear, whether its 40mph or 70mph, in the Cruze Eco, makes it abundantly apparent the flywheel springs are chattering.

The diagnostics for a broken flywheel spring or bearing plate clearly states it is due to low-rpm applications.

There is a reason all 4-cylinder vehicles have high rpm (above 2000) cruising speeds (automatics excluded) because most manufactures (GM and VW excluded apparently) know the wear on the drive train is unacceptable.

Samus there were early issues with some of the clutches on the 2012 Cruze Ecos. For about three months. Luckily mine was produced after that. I get no vibration unless I am lugging the engine by being in too low a gear and going too slow(<1200 rpm).

There are already guys with over 50-60,000 miles on their 2012 Ecos. If their clutch or flywheel was going to prematurely fail, I think it would have by now.

And my issue with E15 or E20 remains that my owners manual states using over E10 voids my warranty and the lower fuel economy.